* Some “design errors” are better than others.
Walter Smith II, who is in a runoff against Joe Citro for a citywide City Council seat, has acknowledged a “design error” in a campaign palm card that referenced the fact that Smith is a “Democrat.” That’s a technical violation of a state statute that prohibits listing a candidate’s party affiliation in an officially nonpartisan election. Oops. A new batch, sans party affiliation, was ordered and distributed.
But maybe there’s an upside to this rookie mistake by a volunteer. It was newsworthy enough to be a prominent, page-one piece in the Tampa Bay Times, which contextually reminded readers that while Citro was also a Democrat, he had been a Republican for his other city council runs in 2007, 2011 and 2015. In effect, the Times’ was reminding readers, including ever-anxious progressives, that Smith is no recent convert in a city where the electorate is more blue than red.
* Here’s one takeaway–besides a surprisingly raucous vibe–from that mayoral debate at Tampa Theatre. No new moderator-questions for the candidates. While transportation, neighborhoods, affordable housing and sustainability deserve to be constants, some others are no less relevant than red light cameras. To wit:
>The Cuban roots of Tampa are a given. Before there was Miami, there was Tampa. As mayor, would you be proactive–as opposed to the incumbent–in pursuing closer contact with Cuba–such as working to recruit a Cuban consulate here?
>While this is a nonpartisan race, Tampa is more “D” than “R,” and voters know who’s what. Why are you–both of you–registered Democrats, when you both used to be Republicans? Is this political pragmatism or ideological epiphany?
>We’re all familiar with the phrase “all politics is local.” But some have made the case that Donald Trump has altered that axiom. Just ask Rick Baker. Is it appropriate to reference Trump in the context of this city’s mayor’s election, including one candidate’s “close ties to Trump-linked lobbying firm” and the other candidate’s “apology” for having voted for him?
>A couple of years ago Mayor Bob Buckhorn, along with his counterparts from several other major Florida cities, tried making the case in Tallahassee for holding city-only referenda. It was driven by transportation initiatives that cities, such as Tampa and St. Petersburg, wanted, but their county residents didn’t. Thus they were defeated. Call it self-determination denied–as well as gridlock maintained. Would you be in favor of making the case that cities such as Tampa should be able to control their own destinies–and not have them negated by those with different priorities who don’t actually live there?